(The views expressed are author's own and not of South Asia Analysis Group -Director)

Recently the Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud Al Faisal made a significant observation in response to a provocative question from a Pakistani scribe while addressing a joint press conference in Islamabad! When asked, “whether Saudi Arabia would consider making the Indian government realize that the Muslims deserved a fair deal”, he responded “Indian Muslims, because of their sheer number, cannot be regarded as a minority. The Indian Muslims were quite capable of looking after their own interests and did not need any support from outside”, a clear snub to Pakistan which does not miss a single opportunity to embarrass India!

How far is the accusation that Indian Muslims look up to Pakistan for emotional support, true? Conversely how far is the perception true, that Pakistan created for the sub continent Muslims is the guardian angel of Indian Muslims?

During the height of Taliban rule in Afghanistan, Kunwar Idris a Pak scribe wrote “The government and clerics alike feel vastly worried if their policies or foreign alignments hurt Afghanistan or anger its people because it is a Muslim country. Amazingly, in a similar situation in relation to India it causes glee, certainly no remorse, because it is not a Muslim country. The plain fact forgotten is that Afghanistan has 25 million Muslims, India has 125 million”!

Yet Talibanised Afghanistan was disowned by Pakistan for its own survival after 9/11! Three million of their own countrymen were butchered in East Pakistan in 1971 resulting in disintegration of Pakistan and the birth of Bangladesh! Pakistan, while shedding crocodile tears, actually endangers Indian Muslims by indulging in acts like cross border terrorism, sabotage, causing riots and distribution of fake Indian currency! The repercussion on Indian Muslims does not seem to weigh as a factor in its calculations!

In an interview Nawabzadaa Nabiullah Khan,What Islam Wants (a confidant of and adviser to the leader of one of the prominent Pakistani Islamic militant outfits, Jamaat-e-Islami) justifies such an attitude when he says “I noticed in my journeys in India that the Hindu farmers generally offer their entire harvest to their gods at the end of their harvesting season. This makes the entire crop as haram for Muslims. Yet these so-called Muslims of India are forced to eat this food which was already offered to some other God other than Allah. This is explicitly forbidden in Quran. And this is one of the serious problems of living in non-Muslim countries. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) knew such things; that is why he ordered Muslims not to live in non-Muslim areas. Yet knowingly these so-called Muslims live in India. Again, all the Muslims who migrate to other countries and US are non-Muslims. Only the Muslims who intend to come back are Muslims not the ones who decide to stay in such countries. Hence we do not care if such Indian Muslims die in the riots” (italics mine)

Anwar Sheikh another Pak scribe says “The Indian Muslims may class themselves as the children of foreign invaders to nurse their inferiority complex but the truth is that 95% of them have the same Indian blood in their veins as all other Indians such as Hindus, Sikhs or Christians. The remaining 5% have certainly become Indians by the long domicile in this country. Have they got anywhere else to go? Never mind other Islamic countries, even Pakistan, which was created for all Muslims of the subcontinent, shall not take them in”. Pakistan is yet to repatriate its own Bihari citizens stranded in Bangladesh since 1971! Shireen M Mazari Director General of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad admits in an article "A strange national tolerance" (THE NEWS- 13 AUG03) writes-- “Yes, it is shameful for Pakistan that Biharis who will not deny their Pakistani citizenship continue to be stranded in Bangladesh since 1971 while Pakistan has allowed other refugees free access to its territory”! If Pakistan cannot take in Indian Muslims as its citizens what right has it got to meddle in the internal affairs of India, endangering local Muslim population?

Does Pakistan care for Kashmiri Muslims? Dr Zakir Hussain (then Vice Chanellor of Aligarh University and later the President of India) wrote to the UN Representative in 1951(Regarding Pak atrocities in J&K in Oct 47)"It is a strange commentary on political beliefs that the same Muslims of Pakistan who like the Muslims of Kashmir to join them invaded the state in October 1947, killing and plundering Muslims in the state and dishonoring Muslim women, all in the interest of what they described as the liberation of Muslims of the State". Kanwar Idris writing in “The Dawn (9 Feb 03) says “Last year an army general was asked to resign one day to take over as president of Azad Kashmir the next day. That may not have violated a law but inevitably caused dismay. Pakistan stands for the right of self-determination for all of the people of Kashmir but here even the free and unsuspecting among them were given no say in choosing a leader of their own”. Sultan Shahin (Balwaristan movement) writes; “Pakistan's refusal to take back dead bodies of Kashmiris killed in Kargil war- had given a powerful fillip to the independence movement in the region. The Balawaris are greatly confused by the pictures of Indian Army and BSF jawans risking their lives to bring the bodies of Pakistani dead soldiers and giving them a proper islamic burial- They are confused because this completely negates all Pakistani propaganda stories about the cruelty, if not total inhumanity of the way Indian security forces conduct themselves in Kashmir”! Pak sponsored militants do not even respect Islam! The Hizbul militants burnt down the last major Sufi shrine Charar-e-Sharif in J&K on May 11, 1995 !

Kuldip Nayar, an ardent promoter of Pakistan-India friendship states (Pak newspaper DAWN-8 FEB2003--CROSSING THE BAR) “My purpose of visiting Pakistan a few weeks ago was to tell Pakistani how their policy of cross-border terrorism had strengthened the BJP on the one hand and harassed Muslims on the other. I found very few responsive ears. At the government level, I suspected a fiendish satisfaction over the emergence of Hindu fundamentalism in India. In any case, what Indian Muslims might face because of Pakistan's policy was not a factor in the reckoning of Islamabad”!

Mr Bhandra Writing in The Dawn (08 Jun 2003) states “ the 1990s were kind to India whereas for Pakistan it was a lost decade. India's rate of GDP growth of about six per cent was almost double ours. In 1990s Pakistan's per capita income was $500 versus $390 for India. Today India is around $500 and Pakistan around $470. Hard-core poverty (under a dollar a day) was said to be 17 per cent in Pakistan in 1988 and by 1999 it was around 33 per cent. So much for the conventional wisdom of our 'intelligent' think tanks that jihadism would 'bleed' India in Kashmir. Apparently, it has only bled us. India today has a middle class, which is more than twice the population of Pakistan. It is poised to join the global economy. It has a critical mass in the basic sciences. … Take the case of Saudi Arabia sitting on the world's largest reserve of oil. It had a per capita income of $ 20,000-plus in the early 1980, it is down to $ 5,000 today. Why? Because its basic attitudes are Taliban-like. Here is living proof that it is not oil and gold that makes a people prosperous but the skill, science and 'beauties of the mind”. Talking of Saudi Arabia, Ali S Awadh Asseri, Saudi Arabian ambassador in Pakistan wrote (PAK OBSERVER on 26 Nov 03) “The recent terrorist attacks in Riyadh prove beyond any doubt what I have been saying for so long that terrorists have no religion. Just imagine! The attacks came in Riyadh. The attacks came in the holy month of Ramazan. The victims were innocent men, women and children from so many different countries… They did not even spare the Holy Qur’an. They desecrated it and used it as a booby trap to achieve their nefarious ends”.

In July 1947, before partition, some of his community members of Central Constituent Assembly asked Mohammad Ali Jinnah for his advice to Indian Muslims in the new State of India. Jinnah, refrained from giving specific advice but cautioned them, " be loyal to India, concentrate on education and politics, and avoid confrontationist politics" and that "they should not seek to ride two horses" (The Muslims in India by A.G.Noorani) . Another quote attributed to Quaid-i-Azam is equally pertinent--"We are all sons of this land. We have to live together. We have to work together and whatever our differences may be, let us at any rate not create more bad blood... Believe me there is no progress of India until the Musalmans and Hindus are united, and let no logic, philosophy or squabble stand in the way of coming to a compromise...".

Despite Godhra and Gujarat, Ahmedabad has returned a Muslim woman as its mayor! Aneesa Begum Nafeesa Ali is probably the first Muslim woman in the country to be elected mayor! This needs to be noted not only by Indian Muslims but by our Media too !

"Jamhooria Islamia", a monthly Baluchi magazine published from Panj-gar, published an interview with Maulana Nawabzadaa Nabiullah Khan, a confidant of and adviser to the Amir of leading Pakistani Islamic party, Jamaat-e-Islami, Maulana Qazi Ahmed, which was conducted by Jalil Amir. The following constitutes are excerpts from that conversation which reveals the fundamentalist ideology and designs of the organisation and its leader.

Q: Please tell us about your stay with Qazi Hussain Ahmed

A: Qazi has two bungalows in Peshawar. We spent lot of time in both the houses. The first house is where his family lived and the second house was his office and rest house. But he used to meet all his friends and relatives and political workers only in his family house. He made sure at least for 3 days in a week, Qazi and his close friends used to spend time in his rest house. Unlike his family house, the rest house had all the amenities that one can think of. It had 36-inch television. 2 satellite dishes to receive all kinds of telecasts from all over the world. He had made extensive notes on all the telecasts. We used to discuss all the things under the sun in his rest house.
I had a habit of drinking small amounts of wine. Qazi never drank or smoked. Qazi knew about my weakness for wine. He advised me not to drink and asked me to follow the steps of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH). Though I had a habit of drinking only in very small amounts of fine wine just before dinner, on Qazi's insistence, I left that habit. When I was studying in engineering college, I had started the habit of smoking too. I left that habit after Qazi's advice on smoking.
I stayed with Qazi for almost 6 years in Peshawar. I did not agree to some of the strategies used by JI during the after Zia years. Qazi is a very practical man while I was more of an idealist at that time. I was insisting that the JI should not rely on ballot as the only route to power. Qazi was insisting that ballot is the only way for JI to come to power in Pakistan. This introduced a sense of alienation between Qazi and me. Hence when I went to Baluchistan to meet my parents, I stayed back rather than going back to Peshawar. Even though almost weekly once we talk over phone, Qazi never called me back to stay with him and I found my work as the Jamaat teacher in Quetta where I stay now with my parents and family.
Yet, my years with Qazi in Peshawar and around the world with him were the most satisfying years in my life intellectually.

Q: What are Qazi's views on Islam and Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)

A: Qazi was a great admirer and student of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) . He modeled his whole thoughts and life on the life and teachings of Mohammad (PBUH). I was astounded many times by Qazi when he does a small thing, he will immediately compare that incident with an incident in Al-Hadith and explain that he did what Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) did 10 centuries ago. I had never seen a person who had modeled his whole life on sayings and teachings of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) like Qazi.

EQUALITY OF MEN AND WOMEN IS STUPIDITY

Q: The women issue is very controversial nowadays. Taliban and some fundamentalist organizations restrict the freedom of women while some progressive Muslim intellectuals are insisting that the women are equal to men in all spheres. What are Qazi's views on women?

A: As I said earlier, the Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) views on women are the exact views of Qazi Ahmed and the Jamat. Equality of men and women is stupidity. What men can do, women cannot do. Women are weak physically and mentally compared to men. Men have to take care of women all the time.

WOMEN MUST STAY HOME

Women should not have a life outside the family. Education can be provided to them, but not to compete with men in public.

NO VOTING RIGHTS FOR WOMEN UNDER SHARIA

Qazi had said once that when JI comes to power in Pakistan, he will abolish the voting rights of women and minorities. Only the Muslim men can participate in voting or standing for elections. When I asked the proof from Hadiths, he had quoted many Hadiths in support of that. I asked him why is it that it is never talked about openly in the public by the Jamaat? Qazi had said that the hints are all over the place. But JI did not make it a big issue since the women who currently have the voting rights may vote against JI in the elections if such a thing is said openly.

NON MUSLIMS IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES MUST PAY JIZYA

Q: That brings us to the question of minorities. Will they have to pay Jizya tax?

A: Yes. They have to pay the tax. As explained by Qazi Ahmed , the idea of Jizya is not protection money. But it is a monetary force on the non-Muslim to convert to Islam. Once the Jamaat comes to power, the minorities will be induced (forced) to become Muslims either by monetary or psychological factors.

ALL INDIAN HINDUS WILL BE CONVERTED INTO ISLAM

JI is already equating India with Hindus so that the Hindus of Pakistan will be forced to become Muslims. This was a very successful strategy during the Babri Masjid riots. JI was actively involved in destroying the Hindu temples in Punjab and Sindh. We ordered the destruction of the Hindu family property too. But our main aim was to destroy the Hindu temples. We wrote in the JI pamphlets that destroying each pagan temple makes a Muslim move closer to the heaven of Allah. We used the Hadiths in all the pamphlets. Babar destroyed the Ram temple in Ayodhya because he was a true believer. The same way, every Muslim should take it upon himself to destroy the Hindu temples in Pakistan. O! ur idea was to encourage the Muslims of India also to destroy the Hindu temples in India. But this was not met with much success since the Hindu police in India started attacking the Muslims who were doing Allah's duty.

Q: What kind of government does JI envisage for Pakistan?

A: It will be the Sharia government. Sharia will be made our constitution so that the eminent Muslim scholars who had completed the schooling in Madrasas will be appointed as the Judges in every court. Qazi wanted to make the presidium on the same model as the Khalifa. Presently our idea is that the entire top leadership of JI as well as all three military Generals will be part of the presidium for which the Qazi will be the Khalifa.

OUR MOTTO IS CONSTANT JIHAD

Our motto is "Constant Jihad". The idea is to keep Pakistan in a constant state of Jihad all the time. Qazi's vision is that Pakistan will be! the centre of the new Islamic Empire that stretches from Burma to Afghanistan and from Srilanka to Tajikistan including Kashmir

Towards that end, the Jamaat will use all tactics from terrorism in the kafir-controlled areas to negotiations in the Muslim controlled areas. Already the Jamaat leaders of Bangladesh and Jamaat leaders of India have accepted the primacy of Pakistani leadership in this regard.

SRI LANKA AND BURMA WILL BE PRESSURIZED TO CONVERT TO ISLAM

Q: What about Srilanka and Burma?

A: Both are Buddhist nations. For that matter even Baluchistan and Afghanistan were Buddhist once while Sindh and Punjab were Hindu earlier. Buddhists are generally weaker in matters of faith. Hence we hope they will become Muslim with a little pressure. But that will happen only after Jamaat conquers first Pakistan and then India.

Q: What are the plans for India? It looks like the entire India policy of the Jamaat revolves around Kashmir.

A: Yes that is true. But that is for a very good reason. See Kashmir is like a keystone that sits on top of the arch. It is true that the arch holds the entire weight of the keystone. But if you remove the keystone, then the whole arch falls down. That is why it is called the keystone. Kashmir is the keystone for India. Once you remove that, then India can no longer be secular and it will not be a united country either. Once Kashmir is taken out, these militancy movements will break India by asking the similar freedom for Nagaland, Kerala, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Manipur, Assam, Jharkand, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Khalistan.

INDIA WILL BE MADE A 100% MUSLIM NATION

Q: Coming back to the same point, if India was to become many countries, how do you deal with the individual Hindu States? They may even become big enemies of Pakistan. Or they may again re-group to challenge Pakistan.

A: Given the differences between the nationalities in India, the options for Pakistan are endless. Qazi's vision is to make the entire India a 100% Muslim Nation. A United India, where Hindus are majority is an impediment to that. Like Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) made Muslims out of pagans of Arabia, Qazi also wants to make Muslims out of the pagans of India.

Q: This is a great vision since this was not even possible for the Muslim dynasties and Moguls who ruled India for the last 700 years.

A: True. That is because they had never really established the Muslim Empire. Though the Kings were Muslims, they had entertained the Hindus in positions of power. When you make an unequivocal statement that only Muslims are voters and declare that India is an Islamic Republic, then automatically the people will become Muslims. Little bit of terror had to be applied to the heart of Hindus and Christians. I will give you a best example. The portions which now constitute Pakistan had 25% Hindu population before Independence.

TERRORIZATION IS THE BEST CONVERSION TOOL

After Independence, a lot of Hindus migrated to India. Yet after the migration, the Pakistani Hindu population was 15%. Do you know what is the percentage now? It is less than 1%. How was this made possible? How did the Hindus convert to Islam in a short span of 20 years whereas for 700 years they had never converted to Islam? That is purely because of the terror of the Partition.

That terror forced the Hindus who remained in Pakistan to become Muslims. Pure and simple. JI used similar techniques in Punjab and Sindh. Each time a riot breaks out in India, we had used that pretext to strike terror among the Hindus, Christians and Ahmaddiahs. The similar terror will be at the heart of every non-Muslim, both Hindu as well as Christian, in the coming years in the entire of India. PRPOHET SUCCEEDED WITH TERROR SO CAN WE Qazi is an analytical genius who knows every strategy that was used by Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and which will be and should be used in India to achieve the total submission to Allah.

Q: Do you envision a possibility that when Kashmir becomes part of Pakistan, there could be large-scale riots in India against Indian Muslims? Hence unwittingly Kashmir could lead to more deaths of Indian Muslims and damage Islamic Ummah.

ANY MUSLIM ASSOCIATING WITH A POLYTHEIST BECOMES A POLYTHEIST

A: Yes that is a possibility. But our ideology is based on Quran and Hadiths. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in numerous Hadiths and Allah in Quran had said that any Muslim who associates with a polytheist is a polytheist. Muslims cannot be friendly with a non-Muslim. This includes the Christians, Jews and Hindus. Also Mohammad (PBUH) says that even if the Muslim ruler is not good, the Muslims stay with the ruler rather than go out to a non-Muslim country. Hadiths and Quran are very explicit regarding this. All the Muslims who did not migrate to Pakistan during Partition are in essence Hindus. They may think that they are Muslims. But not before Allah.

They are as self-deluded as the Ahmaddiahs who think they are Muslims when everyone knows that they are not Muslims. Hence the Muslims of India who had decided to stay in India during Partition are not Muslims and their progeny are not Muslim (since they did not migrate to Muslim lands).

Another thing that I noticed in my journeys in India is that the Hindu farmers generally offer their entire harvest to their gods at the end of their harvesting season. This makes the entire crop as haram for Muslims. Yet these so-called Muslims of India are forced to eat this food which was already offered to some other God other than Allah. This is explicitly forbidden in Quran.

MUSLIMS GOING TO NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES TO SETTLE DOWN ARE KAFIRS

And this is one of the serious problems of living in non-Muslim countries. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) knew such things; that is why he ordered Muslims not to live in non-Muslim areas. Yet knowingly these so-called Muslims live in India. AGAIN ALL THE MUSLIMS WHO MIGRATE TO OTHER NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES AND US ARE NON MUSLIMS . Only the Muslims who intend to come back are Muslims not the ones who decide to stay in such countries. Hence we do not care if such Indian Muslims die in the riots.

But due to strategy reasons we do have excellent relations with these Muslims. All the Muslims who work for Pakistan and for the glory of Ummah are real Muslims. They are our front line troops in non-Muslim countries. Hence we have to distribute the arms and ammunitions to these real Muslims in case riots come to their door.

The Kashmiri Muslims are pure Muslims who are toiling under the yoke of Hindu rule. They are victimized by the international conspiracy to keep them under the Hindu rule. That issue is part of the incomplete Partition, whereas the Indian Muslims have accepted Partition and stayed on in India knowingly.

JAMAT WILL BRING SLAVERY BACK TO PAKISTAN Arabians own slaves. Though Allah says that the slaves should be treated in a nice manner, he did not advocate the abolition of slavery. If slavery is bad as considered in today's world, Allah certainly would have said that slavery is wrong. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) also said that the slaves should be treated in a good manner and the slaves should be released often. But if there is no slavery, how can anyone release slaves? Hence the re-introduction of slavery in Pakistan is one of the future plans of the Jamaat.

ALL CAPTURED HINDUS WILL BE MADE SLAVES

All the captured Hindu Indians and Srilankans will be made slaves to work for Pakistani Muslims. Every God-abiding Pakistani Muslim will get slaves once we conquer India. All the slaves who embrace Islam will be set free. Slavery is Islamic. Jamaat is the only political party, which does not voice any opposition to the slavery in Pakistan. We went around all over Arabia. We were surprised to know that there are some Hindus in Yemen. These ancient Yemeni Hindus are not Indians. In my opinion, these Hindus are traders from India in the ancient times. I was also surprised to know that they have a Shiva temple in Yemen. Qazi was very unhappy over this. When he talked to the Yemen leaders, he broached this subject. But the Yemeni leaders refused Qazi's suggestion of forced conversion of these people to Islam. I don't know why they refused. I think it may be due to the large population of Hindus from India who work in Yemen and Arabia. He disliked the current leadership of Arabia for this reason.

In his opinion, Arabia should not allow any non-Muslim into the holy lands of Arabia. Arabia should be 100% pure. A large number of Hindus in Arabia is corrupting the Arabians. Though they live as contractors, they have the potential to corrupt the minds of the Arabians.

HINDU TEMPLES POLLUTE MUSLIM LANDS

One such thing is the presence of Arabians in the Qatar Hindu temple. First the king allowed the Hindus to build a temple and church in the holy lands, thereby polluting the Holy Land. Second is that even a member of the Royal family visited that temple to inaugurate that temple. To the horror of Qazi, he had learnt that one of the powerful members of the Qatar Royal family is a devotee of a god called Aayappan. This news resolved Qazi to fight the force of the devil thousand fold.

Q: Such things happen in Pakistan today. I mean a friend of mine goes to a Hindu temple. Another friend goes to church meetings.

A: Yes. One of Qazi's relatives wanted to become a Hindu. He did not have a child for many years and it seems he had prayed to a Hindu God and got the child. Hence he felt thankful to that god and wanted to become a Hindu. Qazi got to know of this and called him and threatened him with dire consequences. That relative did not become a Hindu. But that incident made Qazi read more about apostasy.

PUNISHMENT FOR APOSTASY IS DEATH

Quran and Hadith clearly say the punishment for abandonment of Islam is death. Since Sharia is not the law in Pakistan, and the current Pakistani Constitution grants the right to change religion, it is legally correct to declare oneself as Hindu or Christian. But once the JI takes over the government, it will make Sharia as the Constitution. Then Pakistan will also legally execute any person who leaves Islam and joins Ahmaddiah, Christianity or Hinduism the same way Iran and Taliban treats its apostates. He also opined that the presence of the Hindu temples in Pakistan is the root cause of the problem and hence we want to destroy all the Hindu temples and Churches in Pakistan.

Q: This brings us into another area. Right now the Internet is becoming widespread. Even Saudi Arabia is connected with the outside world. Destroying the temples may be good, but how can we insulate the Pakistani and Muslim people against the corrupting knowledge totally?

A: JI had taken a principled stand on the matter of science and religion. Religion is far superior to science.

ALL THE WORLD�S KNOWLEDGE IS IN QURAN AND HADITHS

Whatever man needs to know is in the Quran and Hadiths. Knowing more will create problems like the Atom bomb and Television.

MUSIC TV AND PHOTOGRAPHY ARE SATANIC AND HARAM Quran and Hadiths are explicit in denouncing pictures. Yet the lure of Satan in the form of photography and television is eating our lives.

Music previously was confined only to the vocal singing. Now science and technology made the music widespread at a cheaper price. These are the lures of Satan. We have to be on guard against these harami things.

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ARE BAD FOR CIVILIZATION

Hence, more science and technology is bad for the civilization. I had completed civil engineering. Hence I am privy to scientific knowledge. I can tell you how corrupting that is. It even makes you question the glorious Quran.

EARTH IS FLAT There are many Hadiths, which say that the earth is flat. But any science will tell you the earth is a sphere. But you can use the same science like the relativity theory to prove that the earth is flat. It is the same case with evolution. But the point being that doubt is sown in the minds of the people on the validity of the Quran as the word of God. More and more we work hard to prove the Quran's scientific correctness, more and more people will get apprehensive of the truth of the Quran. This is an abomination.

WHEN ISLAM TALKS OF GET EDUCATED IT MEANS QURANIC EDUCATION

This is why when we talk of education, we talk of religious education and not scientific education.

It is true that science grew after the Prophet's revolution in Arabia. That was the start of science. Now each and every science is filled with anti-god stuff. If you want to become a doctor, you have to read evolution. If you have to read any engineering, you have to believe in the billions of years old universe theory which effectively says that human beings came to the world only just one or two million years back.

Q: But we still need the arms and knowledge of the Western world, which believes in science. And again you had referred to television as evil. If we abolish photography how can we have passports or identification cards?

A: Yes. That is strategic. With the help of Allah, we will be given oil for them to run their cars and we will have arms in that place. We will use their arms to destroy them in the course of time.

PHOTOGRAPHY WILL BE BANNED UNDER JI

As far as photos are concerned, they will be banned as it was done in Afghanistan under Taliban. If there is no need for people to go out of Pakistan, where is the need for the passports? For those who have to travel to other countries like the leaders of the revolution, they only will be given the passport with photos. For that, we will allow limited photography licensed only to the government. And the biggest corruption in today's Pakistan is Indian satellite TV and Indian cinemas and Indian songs. We have to abolish these too.

ARABIC WILL BE MADE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF PAKISTAN

Q: Currently we have a lot of opposition from Mohajirs regarding reservations. What kind of reservation policy will the JI will have in Pakistan?

A: We approach that problem as the problem of language. Urdu-speaking Muslims and Sindhi-speaking Muslims are fighting now. We plan to abolish all the regional languages like Pashto, Sindhi, Baluchi, Urdu, Punjabi and Brahvi. We want all the people of Pakistan to speak Arabic which is our divine language. This will make everyone equal before everyone else and there would not be any need for language or region based reservations. We also hope that this will make the Quran and Hadiths easier to understand and will make the people follow the Quran and Hadiths to the letter.

Q: There could be language riots. One such language riot resulted in Bangladesh.

A: Bangladesh was not a result of language riot. The very idea that they are Muslims will bring the Bangladeshis to Arabic. We already fund heavily the Arabic language courses all over India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. From Morocco to Iraq speaks in Arabic, I don't see any reason why from Morocco to Burma we will not bring Arabic to the people. Even Bangladesh will start speaking in Arabic. That time there won't be any Bangladesh where the country name itself has the name of the language. Yes. Right now our aim is just for reunification without touching on the language issue of Bengali. JI of Bangladesh is working towards this aim.

Q: The secular journalists of Pakistan oppose the JI. For example the Dawn and News are very critical of the JI. How do you see their role in the future?

A: Ardheshir Cowasjee is able to work only because of the present Constitution of Pakistan. When Sharia becomes the Constitution, he cannot even approach the court, as he is a kafir. We see secular journalists as our main enemy in the current struggle to reach power. These secular journalists are digging our statements we made during the pre-Independence days and trying to beat us. Of course we opposed the creation of Pakistan during the British times. But that was a different Jamaat. Our history starts with Independence.

SECULARS ARE KAFIRS

Secular journalists are not Muslims even though some of them are carrying Muslim names. Let them come to us and let us ask questions on the Quran and Hadiths. We will prove each and every thing we say is from Quran and Hadiths. Let them prove what we say as wrong from the Quranic angle. Then we will accept them. But they cannot. They cannot match us in any debate concerning the Quran and Hadiths. We can comprehensively prove that they are indeed non-Muslims.! They are like Quadianis who say that the Muslim need not take up Jihad as an obligation. That is pure nonsense.

Pakistan has killed more muslims than anyone else in the subcontinent, they committed genocide against Bangladesh in 1971, they brought the Americans in and killed the Afghans ; they started a proxy war and killed Kashmiri muslims and a proxy war against Iran thru Jindullah. When they are not killing muslims in the neighborhood they are killing their own shiiites or baluchis. These guardians of islam did not even make a comment when the uighurs were slaughtered in China last year, something they are quick to do against India when the opportunity presents itself.

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens

In a tranquil place like St Andrews, there are not many distractions, so I have been reading lots of history and trying to reflect on its lessons. For some time now, I have been interested in the dynamics of Hindu-Muslim relations, and the impact of ancient enmities and grievances on current Indo-Pak relations.

We have forgotten much of our past, but it nonetheless affects our daily lives.

For instance, when we now think of the Afghan city of Kandahar, we equate it with the Taliban. But its original name was Gandhara, and it was a part of the ancient Buddhist civilisation with its capital city in Taxila. Swat, Peshawar and the Kabul Valley were all included in this thriving, peaceful community that had absorbed Mediterranean culture brought to the subcontinent by Alexander, and before him, by Greek mercenaries and traders.

While it was no utopia, it was a stable, prosperous civilisation that threatened none of its neighbours, and has bequeathed us a wealth of artefacts that attest to its high level of cultural development.

The reason I mention this period of history is to try and understand the bitterness that must exist in many Hindu minds over the Muslim conquest of their country. In his Story of Civilisation, Will Durant writes: “The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest in history”. While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enouh to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan.

The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed. Indeed, the presence of Muslim historians on their various campaigns has ensured that the memory of their deeds will live long after they were buried.

Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.

These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage. When these warriors settled in India, they ruled as absolute despots over a cowed Hindu populace. For generations, their descendants took their martial superiority over their subjects for granted. When the British exposed the decadence of the Moghuls and seized power, the Muslims — especially the aristocracy — tried to cut deals with the new rulers to ensure that they would be treated differently from the Hindus.

It has been argued by some historians that Pakistan was really created to ensure that the Muslim ruling class would not be subject to Hindu rule in an undivided India. But having created Pakistan, the ruling elites promptly started lording it over the Bengalis of East Pakistan. What, after all, is the point of being descendants of Tughlak, Aibak and Mahmud if there is no under-class to persecute and exploit?

This, then, is the Hindu perspective of the Muslim invasion of their country. After centuries of first Muslim and then British rule, they are finally in charge of their destiny. For the first time in modern history, Indians feel that they can play a role on the world stage in keeping with their numbers and the size of their country.

Pakistan, especially its establishment and military, is smarting from successive military defeats and the steady diminishing of its international image. Due to their long domination of much of India, the Muslim elite in Pakistan feels it has some kind of divine right to be treated on a par with India.

With this psychological and historical baggage, both sides are unable to engage constructively with each other. Many Hindus feel they have centuries of humiliation to avenge. And a substantial number of Pakistani Muslims are secretly convinced that they are inherently superior to the Hindus.

One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines. And many Hindus converted to Islam to further their military or civil service careers. As a result of this intermingling, despite proud boasts of pure bloodlines, most Pakistanis have many Hindu ancestors.

This reality makes the Hindu-Muslim divide all the more bitter, for it pits brother against brother. And as students of Moghul history are aware, this is perhaps the bloodiest kind of conflict. By ties of consanguinity, culture, geography, and history, there is far more that unites than divides Indian Hindus and Muslims. But the politics of self-interest, too often garbed in the banner of faith, has pushed them far apart.

Why resurrect these ghosts from history? Because until we have confronted the demons from our past, we cannot understand the dynamics of contemporary events. As India and Pakistan go through the intricate steps of peace talks, each side needs to know what makes the other tick.

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens.

A study and understanding of the past will promote better understanding between the two communities. It is important that Hindus grasp the central fact that their Muslim neighbours cannot now be held responsible for the persecution of their ancestors, and Muslims must face the fact that they are not the political heirs of the emperors Babar and Akbar.

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens

In a tranquil place like St Andrews, there are not many distractions, so I have been reading lots of history and trying to reflect on its lessons. For some time now, I have been interested in the dynamics of Hindu-Muslim relations, and the impact of ancient enmities and grievances on current Indo-Pak relations.

We have forgotten much of our past, but it nonetheless affects our daily lives.

For instance, when we now think of the Afghan city of Kandahar, we equate it with the Taliban. But its original name was Gandhara, and it was a part of the ancient Buddhist civilisation with its capital city in Taxila. Swat, Peshawar and the Kabul Valley were all included in this thriving, peaceful community that had absorbed Mediterranean culture brought to the subcontinent by Alexander, and before him, by Greek mercenaries and traders.

While it was no utopia, it was a stable, prosperous civilisation that threatened none of its neighbours, and has bequeathed us a wealth of artefacts that attest to its high level of cultural development.

The reason I mention this period of history is to try and understand the bitterness that must exist in many Hindu minds over the Muslim conquest of their country. In his Story of Civilisation, Will Durant writes: “The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest in history”. While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enouh to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan.

The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed. Indeed, the presence of Muslim historians on their various campaigns has ensured that the memory of their deeds will live long after they were buried.

Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.

These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage. When these warriors settled in India, they ruled as absolute despots over a cowed Hindu populace. For generations, their descendants took their martial superiority over their subjects for granted. When the British exposed the decadence of the Moghuls and seized power, the Muslims — especially the aristocracy — tried to cut deals with the new rulers to ensure that they would be treated differently from the Hindus.

It has been argued by some historians that Pakistan was really created to ensure that the Muslim ruling class would not be subject to Hindu rule in an undivided India. But having created Pakistan, the ruling elites promptly started lording it over the Bengalis of East Pakistan. What, after all, is the point of being descendants of Tughlak, Aibak and Mahmud if there is no under-class to persecute and exploit?

This, then, is the Hindu perspective of the Muslim invasion of their country. After centuries of first Muslim and then British rule, they are finally in charge of their destiny. For the first time in modern history, Indians feel that they can play a role on the world stage in keeping with their numbers and the size of their country.

Pakistan, especially its establishment and military, is smarting from successive military defeats and the steady diminishing of its international image. Due to their long domination of much of India, the Muslim elite in Pakistan feels it has some kind of divine right to be treated on a par with India.

With this psychological and historical baggage, both sides are unable to engage constructively with each other. Many Hindus feel they have centuries of humiliation to avenge. And a substantial number of Pakistani Muslims are secretly convinced that they are inherently superior to the Hindus.

One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines. And many Hindus converted to Islam to further their military or civil service careers. As a result of this intermingling, despite proud boasts of pure bloodlines, most Pakistanis have many Hindu ancestors.

This reality makes the Hindu-Muslim divide all the more bitter, for it pits brother against brother. And as students of Moghul history are aware, this is perhaps the bloodiest kind of conflict. By ties of consanguinity, culture, geography, and history, there is far more that unites than divides Indian Hindus and Muslims. But the politics of self-interest, too often garbed in the banner of faith, has pushed them far apart.

Why resurrect these ghosts from history? Because until we have confronted the demons from our past, we cannot understand the dynamics of contemporary events. As India and Pakistan go through the intricate steps of peace talks, each side needs to know what makes the other tick.

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens.

A study and understanding of the past will promote better understanding between the two communities. It is important that Hindus grasp the central fact that their Muslim neighbours cannot now be held responsible for the persecution of their ancestors, and Muslims must face the fact that they are not the political heirs of the emperors Babar and Akbar.

Pakistan looks at itself as the inheritor of the Muslim invaders of India. They have a strong identity crisis. Most fake themselves as of foreign invader's descent, denying their Hindu ancestry.

They use the condition of Indian Muslims as an excuse to bash India and justify the TNT which they need to do every waking second of their life. They are incapable of caring for human life, even Pakistani let alone Indian.

Pakistan looks at itself as the inheritor of the Muslim invaders of India. They have a strong identity crisis. Most fake themselves as of foreign invader's descent, denying their Hindu ancestry.

They use the condition of Indian Muslims as an excuse to bash India and justify the TNT which they need to do every waking second of their life. They are incapable of caring for human life, even Pakistani let alone Indian.

Click to expand...

I think we need to start compiling all the incidents of pakistan army brutaliy over its own muslim population-like on balochis,pukhtoons,bangladeshis,mohajirs,shiya ,Ahmediya,christians hindus,sikhs.